G.R. No. 83067 March 22, 1990
RAMON C. RUBIO, JR., petitioner, vs. HON. PATRICIA A. STO. TOMAS as Chairman of the Civil Service Commission, FILEMON B. CAWAD and ALFREDO B. DEZA, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Ramon C. Rubio, Jr., a Chief Personnel Specialist at the Civil Service Commission (CSC) Regional Office in Davao City, received a letter dated December 28, 1987, from then CSC Chairman Celerina Gotladera notifying him that he was not reappointed in the CSC reorganization and was separated from service effective February 1, 1988. On January 29, 1988, petitioner applied for optional retirement effective March 7, 1988. However, on February 18, 1988, claiming he discovered he had actually been reappointed as early as July 1, 1987, he wrote a letter withdrawing his retirement application. This withdrawal was received by the CSC Central Office.
Despite the withdrawal, respondent CSC Chairman Patricia Sto. Tomas, upon assuming office, approved petitioner’s optional retirement effective March 8, 1988, and informed him of this approval via a letter dated April 21, 1988. Petitioner filed this special civil action, arguing the approval despite his withdrawal constituted grave abuse of discretion and unlawful dismissal. The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) supported petitioner’s position, leading the CSC to represent itself.

ISSUE

Whether respondent CSC Chairman committed grave abuse of discretion in approving petitioner’s optional retirement despite his prior withdrawal of the application.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, ruling there was no grave abuse of discretion. The Court emphasized that the filing of an application for optional retirement and its subsequent withdrawal are not unilateral acts that automatically take effect. Both require approval by the proper authority—in this case, the CSC Chairman—whose discretion must be exercised in the interest of the service.
The Court found that the approval was justified based on the CSC’s assessment of petitioner’s performance and qualifications. The record contained multiple negative evaluations and recommendations from his superiors, including respondent Regional Director Filemon Cawad, which formed a reasonable basis for the CSC to decide not to retain him in the service. The authority to approve a retirement application or its withdrawal inherently includes the discretion to evaluate the employee’s continued usefulness and efficiency. Therefore, Chairman Sto. Tomas’ decision to approve the retirement, prioritizing the service’s interest over the employee’s withdrawal, was a valid exercise of administrative discretion and not arbitrary or capricious.
Regarding representation, the Court noted that while the OSG generally represents government agencies, it has a duty to present the legal position it deems in the government’s best interest, even if contrary to its client’s. However, in such situations, the OSG should inform the client agency of its stance and refrain from representing the adverse private party.